User-Friendly Differential Voltage Analysis Freeware for the Analysis of Degradation Mechanisms in Li-Ion Batteries
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A user-friendly differential voltage analysis software has been developed and is described here. High-precision reference potential-specific capacity data for Li/negative electrode and Li/positive electrodes, as well as the cycled full cell potential-specific capacity, must be supplied by the user. From these, the differential voltage versus capacity, dV/dQ vs. Q, of a full Li-ion cell is calculated and compared to experiment. The calculated dV/dQ vs. Q curve has four adjustable parameters which are optimized manually with slider bars or automatically by least squares fitting of the calculation to experiment. The parameters are the positive electrode mass, the negative electrode mass, the positive electrode slippage and the negative electrode slippage. Examples of the use of the program are given for graphite/LiCoO2 wound cells cycled for hundreds of cycles. The variation of the four parameters with cycle number give insights into the mechanisms of cell failure equivalent to that which could be obtained with a Li reference electrode inserted within the cell. The software is available free of charge by contacting the authors.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it